Jackson v. Packer
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Tins was an action of assumpsit, brought by the plaintiff, as indorsee of a bill of exchange, drawn by Samuel Dexter, as agent of the Boiven Bleaching and Calendering Company upon the defendants, and by them accepted, for 1000 dollars, dated June 24th, 1837, payable four months after date, to the drawer’s order, at either bank in Providence.
Read the full summary
Tins was an action of assumpsit, brought by the plaintiff, as indorsee of a bill of exchange, drawn by Samuel Dexter, as agent of the Boiven Bleaching and Calendering Company upon the defendants, and by them accepted, for 1000 dollars, dated June 24th, 1837, payable four months after date, to the drawer’s order, at either bank in Providence. The cause was tried at Brooklyn, January term, 1839, before Waite, J. The plaintiff read in evidence the bill of exchange described in the declaration. The hand-writing of the several parties to the bill and the copartnership of the defendants, were…
1Opinion of the CourtWaite, J.
1. The bill of exchange in this case, was made payable at either Bank, in Providence, and demand of payment was made at one of them. The defendants say, this was not sufficient, because the plaintiff had not previously given the defendants notice, where the demand would be made. It seems, that the legal construction given to such contract, is, that the bill will be paid at either of the banks which the holder may select. North Bank v. Abbot,, 13 Pick. 465. Beeching & al. v. Gower, Holt, N. P. 313. With respect to the previous notice, it is not required by the express terms of the bill; nor…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Wallace v. McConnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1839
- Bank of United States v. DunnSupreme Court of the United States · 1832
- Churchill v. SuterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1808
- Ruggles v. PattenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1812
- Bank of the Metropolis v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1834
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Astor v. Union InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1827
- Lusk State Bank v. Town Council of LuskWyoming Supreme Court · 1935
- President of Malden Bank v. BaldwinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1859